tv [untitled] March 17, 2014 4:00am-4:31am PDT
be used for events that include the public so the public only has access to dan rush parish park for two months out of the year. the next area of new york that raises a great concern is union square where the private nonprofit has placed a in this very historic park has placed a very high-class restaurants that's for profit even though the nonprofit is not profiting from it indirectly. union square i mean bryant square is the most damning of those provisions. sorry >> thank you. next speaker please. oh, let me call a few more
names. go ahead and come to the podium (calling names) >> good afternoon. i'm rancho i'm the director of policies and communications inform the san francisco parks lions i'm here to speak in favor of the program we think this is a wonderful way to add to the space and encourage stewardship of our public spaces. our streetscapes partner with public utilities that's a useful model to think about when our considering this program because it has allowed neighbors to take an interest in underutilized public spaces and turn them into
maskal neighborhood gyms the hidden sunset in the - a buff beautiful i'll work and the penn e pennsylvania garden has been a gem so we think this is a very positive extension of that idea. and we want to always encourage more activation and beneficial uses of public spaces while preserving the access to public space. i understand about this program it's very clear that the vast majority of the time the space will remain assessable to the public and add features that will make the spaces better than they are today.
thank you very much >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm a project manager at the city plans. we currently collaborate with the city and are in support of the activation of the project. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm lynn the executive director of people and plazas. concert program i've been doing this for 21 years i can testify of the difficulty of putting anything on in small public places because of the variety of permits you have to get and the differences even if people that are responsible for the area. so with that hat i know what it takes to activate public is that
a and know what happens when you have a small public space with a concerted or some other activities it turns into a maskal area in the castro i've done all the is that a brought microscopic. those concerts are free and open to the public no one is ever asked to leaf for any reason it's a treat. i have another hat i live close to ma copy i think area had the freeway put back into our neighborhood and the freeway ramp made a dead end street and it's been problems but we're going to have a park there. we want to make sure that park
is utilized by the neighborhood and have things going on this. so, of course, i support this legislation. and i hope that we can have vibrant spaces this is to bring people in not out. thank you very much >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm david. i'm here representing off the imprisoned as well as activate ma copy i am and in support of the proposal. i'm going to speak on two elements one is for the nonprofit and one for me. off the grade has been involved in the ma copy i am hub and
insuring with the community at large had food available and made sure that the space was in a safe environment. i know the nonprofit elements like that are important in activating spaces providing areas for the community members to engage and get food. speaking from the activate macomb i am side in november i lead a initiative to activate ma copy i am for a whole 90 month it brought speakers and panels and music and brought people together and created an environment that was supportive to all the neighbors and give the homeless representatives in this neighborhood something and they were empowered.
from that point this program the proposed program is important because what i had to do to get that initiative up and running was laborious. so going through the fire department and the attempt commission aclu was cumbersome. so this will help the nonprofits and stewards to make sure we can activate those public spaces in a much more easier process and make sure the public has a space to enjoy >> thank you very much. next speaker please. good afternoon, commissioners and commissioner president wu. i want to thank the staff and mayor's office for bringing up forgot 80 this legislation.
our approximately committee has recommended to the board the package and they'll be discussing the matter tonight hover san francisco beautiful became involved and the permitting and the process by which the city of san francisco allows and regulates that. when we worked with the mayor's office are sunday street and the scott process when it came to the streetscape processes. i know this package will continue the work and address the problems we see as community organizations or as individuals working to provide programming for the public free of charge and use those wonderful spaces that san francisco has built. so i would as an individual encourage you to review the
legislation in keeping in mind we've built those spaces and people can come to them and activate them with activities that draw people here. thank you for the opportunity for the public to speak. i'm looking forward to hearing from you next week >> thank you. next speaker please. hello, i'm with the union square district. my position is as a service and streetscapes project manager. we as business improvement district have 27 districts within the area and we're funded through a line item on the property tax bill to fund cleanliness and safety and activation of san francisco's 27
downtown blocks that's the enar very of many cities and this is to make it a better place to visit and shop we support 24. first of all, it's the old activation obviously union square is interested in bringing more people here not only to shop but to joy san francisco we're a gateway to the city gives people a reason to visit. we currently have several plazas that are underutilized in their ability to activate the programs and put a great face on san francisco and have people return to our city. we like about this legislation it industrialize what's been traditionally or historically a
difficult place to get permits to do events so an umbrella under a larger organization to work with anyone to activate streets and plazas. on a personal note i've seen this legislation i see the new york model i was in new york last year and met that the new york transportation officials as well as officials that have the plazas in their districts the city has transformed where those plazas occurred it was phenomenal where people can sit and relax and be a passive observer of life i'll be back in new york talking about the public spaces to push for this type of legislation to promote it in new york and people are visiting those sites were in the
manhattan in the brooklyn area. so on that basis i support this legislation thank you very much. thank you >> next speaker please. good afternoon tom executive director of liveable city. we participate with the city to take over nonprofit use. one thing i can tell you 0 we feel the most dangerous thing you can do with public space is fill it with face moving cars but the city makes you jump through the hoops that's how wild the city gets. we encourage the truly public
and civic uses of public spaces is good. i like what he hear here. i think you need to do a lot of work to convince the stakeholders this isn't only about privatization only to distinguish this is a public uses with a civic use vs. the privatization of public spaces. one thick i'd like to talk about part of the problem you have is p zoning it means public it's from the city hall from the plazas like plaza it's universities and schools basically anything this is for public use. it's hard to draw a set of controls for the use when it's got to cover all kinds of different uses some are open space uses and buildings that
are owned by public entities we might want to distinguish between open space uses and other public buildings that will allow you to do a set of planning controls that makes sense. parks and plazas and on the other hand the parks and use. other cities make the distinction. mostly we have mission bay that has it's on open space and park merced and ti do it's useful we've created the designation 3 times. you might want to look at as you're doing the planning code changes amended our zoning map to create the distinction.
if you did that you could krauft the right controls for the two very different sets. thank you >> thank you. next speaker. >> patricia. this legislation disturbs me by the word stewardship and nonprofit. are we going to get a bunch of people that come to the neighborhood and form associations i think you should put in the legislation this have to be in xoips for a period of time so people don't come up with a phoney name and claim nonprofit. everybody says its marred hard to get a permit i've looked at
this and saw people never have had a problem if you give our name on a piece of pair they give you a permit i've never had a problem. privatization does worry me but the stewardship who's running it and making money on the side deal i think we should look into how that stewardship is written in this legislation. thank you >> thank you. next speaker. any further comment >> katherine presently alliance those people were potential
vendors there are many individual groups that were not consulted. it countries out for meeting within each district to let people know about the open space speaker to my mind does this apply to the recession and department plan whatever decisions it should be thoroughly rewritten to state without exception none of that is without open space. the dpw and the puc control an enormous amount of open space but the public has no clear idea what will be impacted by the legislation. as a landscape architect i appreciate this but we have
great boxes and it's referred to as a bible in this legislation there scott wagner would be quotes from children's books to have more contacted with the nature. and the impact of planting large trees is important. under this legislation there will be a negative impact on vegetation when massive trees were cut down for the trucks to get access to the farmer's markets. who will control all of this activation that must be the word of 2013 and 2014 and who will be responsible. there's no mention of the impact on historic plaza are historic open space and surrounding buildings this legislation
should be thoroughly reviewed before further action it taken. i want to tell you a story in 2008, there was a parks bond a neighborhood parks bond and in the bond it says this is a not a migrate to golden gate park. we thought it was a good idea but perhaps ancillary there was a bond book it says oh, yeah. is included other areas. we didn't know is at the time, we would never have done it was a trojan horses now, please we don't want trojan horses and number one privatization of our plazas >> thank you. next speaker. >> if i could ask all the people who are standing around
the industry way your creating a fire hazard you need to stand on on the other side of the room there's an overflow room 421 you can view and hear those procedures. >> good afternoon. i'm the chair of the land use and housing committee. most of the people all the people that spoke positively will this program are obviously stakeholders. and unfortunately, the general public the neighborhood associations people who live in the city were not involved in this process. this plan might be a very good one but we don't know. there were many comments but
unless we know the details of it more thoroughly and i was told that ken rich well, is willing to meet with us but we have many, many questions we don't want a public spaces to be controlled or taken away we need to know exactly what type of stewardship responsibilities and what are the financial responsibilities who is going to pay for this and public upkeep a number of questions. the scope of this legislation is unknown. the p listing there's thousands of lots and properties in the p listing this has to be zeroed in so we know exactly what could be removed from public activities. there are, you know, example
there should be an annual review nooishl to find out how successful or how this is going to worked out for the general public. so in closing we need to have public informed we need to have us included as part of the stakeholders and practical continue this. we want to discuss that that san francisco's general assembly next week and hopefully, we'll get more information because public open space is very sponsor important to all san franciscans. as a side note planning has been very good in planning housing on the other hand, this is a city that needs coordination and we saw an article about the p both sides. in the park that's a good
example that open space is not being kept you up this is a good example we need the public needs more information please continue >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is paul wormer. i first time to acknowledge a very good discussion yesterday. i was reading in the draft legislation i think i have two comments that are a little bit different that have been made by oogsz others. one of the big concerns was dover how permissive the use of p zone property is and this legislation brought that to the floor.
i think that's a serious issue and i believe tom suggestion let's take a look at the p zones and differentiate between them because the school and police station and courthouse and fire department and park s are not the same and to assume you can have a blanket activity in all of them is mistaken. so i urge you as part of the legislation to pull together some kind of review of what we mean by p zone properties and what might be appropriate in the different levels that needs public outreach. the second part is specifically with respect to the plaza legislation. i'm concerned because what's tagged on there is activation or a maintenance. i've seen what's happened with
the rec and park properties to the point where communities do their own fundraising. i'm concerned because i see what happened with the street tree program this wonderful idea to plant lots and loss of trees oh, we can't afford it but not all property owners only those who have the trees in front of their driveway. so there's this transfer responsibility of what was put forth noticeably as a public ordinance. this is a public-private relationship that necessity not attract as many visitors to the plaza and please as part of that program i urge that there be
some baseline definition of plaza maintenance that the city is responsible for and does take ownership for so the stewardship programs are not if you want the pavement fixed you need to form a stewardship organization to get it done that's wrong. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. pete cowen and speaking here as an individual i'm tempted to say a few words by the way, i'm fall with the upper market area. aside from the private-public partnerships and the general open space philosophyly what
strikes me what the essential needs. the upper market has been kind of unbelievable how much change but some of the basic day to day needs like public safety haven't been talked about from van ness up to castro not a single bit of public safety has been done. there's plenty of public-private partnerships if you want to have a private company do zebra stroip but we don't see that enthusiasm it's not sexy enough i want to point out i encourage you all to a not only be attracted by a neat program
that's brought before you in a community building sense what's the essential day to day nodes ease prioritized and are they getting done if it takes private-public partnership but minimum public safety aren't getting the attention and things like plazas and vendor and programming are. i'm not sure that's exactly the highest proprietor for this particular community. again not to a rain cold water on plazas but to make sure there's a balance of the kinds of program implementation that's happening in the changing community. thanks. thank you >> thank you. >> sue hester i think you've
heard a lot of commission of by the public you're used to dealing with in this legislation. in t in t in t in the first page it says the planning commission is involved why did we have claudia coming to the commission talking about public sites in january. what i realize is the entirety of the people in the city that are dealing with this are non-commissioned departments that don't report to the public and dpw and dwp and department of real estate being third where's the public information available? i heard about this public-private process for the
first time in the presentation that earner neighborhoods by a private developer who is planning america's cup on using the stub end back to you 80 which is supposed to be by another program in the city and he was very enthusiastic about this program. the environmental review that comes to you does not identify which projects are likely candidates for the space next door to them being used by this process. there's no listed projects. we don't know the environmental review ignores it. it would be very helpful in the environmental review has to talk about what's happening in the quarter of a mile in the benefit